Scott, who hosted the event at his New Spirit Revival Center, told the audience that a “nationally known” preacher warned Trump before he launched his campaign “that if you choose to run for president, there’s going to be a concentrated Satanic attack against you.”

“He said there’s going to be a demon, principalities and powers, that are going to war against you on a level that you’ve never seen before and I’m watching it every day,” Scott said.

Later, Scott’s wife, Belinda Scott, prayed over Trump: “God we ask you right now that Your choice is this choice.”

“God, I ask that you would touch this man, Donald J. Trump,” she continued, “give him the anointing to lead this nation.”

The conspiracy theories surrounding Hillary Clinton’s health have always had sexist undertones, but leave it to WorldNetDaily to make that sexism painfully explicit.

In a column today in WorldNetDaily, psychology professor Kent G. Bailey explains that Clinton “looks more stressed, haggard and out of focus with each passing day” because, from “a paleopsychological standpoint, it simply is not natural, normal, or fair for a diminutive, pudgy, non-athletic and cerebral old lady to be forced into combat with an imposing, 6-foot-3-inch, 237-pound septuagenarian who drives a golf ball 300 yards and eats nails for breakfast.”

Clinton, he writes, has been forced into this “freakish situation” while “warrior extraordinaire Donald Trump is fully in his element at this moment and is thoroughly enjoying every aspect of the fray.” The presidential race, he explains, is “implicitly pitting the world of women against the world of men.”

He then goes on to offer several “paleopsychological observations” about why women are not suited to be national leaders, concluding that “if Hillary Clinton is elected, the continuing infantilization and feminization of American men will further explode, society as we know it will crumble, and the regression back to our pagan roots will be complete.”

… Third, our species’ history and our human nature have no place for head-to-head combat between the genders because females are simply too valuable to waste on hopeless and non-adaptive ventures. To try it is to court the worse forms of stress for the woman. There is simply no woman in the world who would have any chance whatsoever against a strong, angry and combat-ready male. …

Fourth, when a woman is faced with male aggression, her first instinct is to cry for help and then find a male protector to do the fighting for her. Hubby Bill has been the real power behind Hillary’s entire political career and her two attempts at the presidency, and he has rushed to her aid frequently in past weeks. Then last week her “friend” and master of charisma Barack Obama came in like a tag team wrestler to nip at Trump and try to improve the ratings. If that were not enough, Al Gore has recently added more male support to the Hillary cause. And that scion of boredom, Tim Kaine, is always around to excuse Hillary’s gaffes, provide emotional support, and testify to her health and well-being. Unfortunately, this quartet of feminized girly men does not add up to one really tough guy. Ten of them might make one Donald Trump … maybe.

Fifth, during the hunting and gathering phase of human history, females depended on males for provisioning and protection and depended heavily on both males and other females during pregnancy. Given the dangers and privations of this way of life, the human female is, by nature, cautious, conforming, highly adaptable under varying conditions and deferential to potentially dangerous male authority figures. She has always needed male protection and continues to need it today. With terrorism on our doorstep, many wise women will realize this fact and shift their vote to Trump by election day.

Sixth, the human female has never defined band, tribe, or national borders nor, once defined, defended them. That is and always was the province of the male of the species. In fact, this principle holds for other species as well as human beings. In Jane Goodall’s masterwork, “The Chimpanzees of Gombe,” she described how adult male chimps first define the borders of particular group territories and then defend them against interlopers – often with extreme and deadly violence. This is never the responsibility of the female chimp. In humans, we have seen how well human females “defend” borders with Angela Merkel welcoming immigrant hordes across the borders in Germany and Hillary Clinton set to do so in America if elected on Nov. 8.

Seventh, if Hillary Clinton is elected, the continuing infantilization and feminization of American men will further explode, society as we know it will crumble, and the regression back to our pagan roots will be complete. The feminist program was never designed to win by defeating men in direct competition, but, rather, to produce “equality” but turning men into women and needy children. And that program has been disastrously successful. That is, until Donald Trump declared political correctness null and void, and he finally put the Democratic Party Republican Guard – the establishment media – in its place.

In conclusion, it is not natural for a woman to engage in direct combat with a man, and it borders on the bizarre when sick and unsteady Hillary is forced by circumstance onto the field of battle with Goliath. It will take more than Candy Crowley to save the day this time.

Dan Stein, the president of the anti-immigrant group Federation for American Immigration Reform, urged Congress yesterday to challenge Plyer v. Doe, the 1982 Supreme Court decision that found that states can’t withhold public school funding for educating undocumented immigrant children, saying that states should instead “be able to charge tuition” to those children.

Stein’s group recently released a reportgriping about the cost of educating the children of both documented and undocumented immigrants, especially those who are learning English.

Virginia talk radio host Rob Schilling asked Stein yesterday what policy proposals he recommend that could combat the cost of educating the children of immigrants, and Stein said that one solution would be to re-litigate Plyer so that “at a minimum” states could charge tuition to undocumented kids.

“Public education should not be viewed as some hallowed ground,” he said. “It doesn’t create an entitlement for the child to be here by enrolling them in school. It basically says, if you’re going to be here, well, yeah, you ought to be in school, but that doesn’t mean you shouldn’t be subject to deportation when the time comes.”

“So it would be great if Congress would pass a statute, pass Plyer again and re-litigate it to the Supreme Court,” he added, “because if you go back and look at that case there’s ample reason to argue that the situation now has radically changed and that at a minimum states should be able to charge tuition if you have no right to be in the country. Obviously, that would face a blowback from MALDEF and the Democratic Party, but that’s something that could be done.”

Rep. Louie Gohmert, R-Texas, claimed yesterday that the reason the Obama administration killed al-Qaeda operative Anwar al-Awlaki, a U.S. citizen, in a drone strike in 2011 was that if they had captured him alive he “would have sung about all the different people he worked with in the administration.”

Gohmert told radio host Howie Carr that the Obama administration has let Muslim Brotherhood groups tied to radicals in on national security decisions, which he said shows that “we always feed the dogs that are trained to bite us.”

He clarified that he wasn’t “saying that Muslims are dogs,” citing his own Muslim friends like “hero” Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi.

He then got onto the subject of what Carr called “anchor babies” and al-Awlaki.

“Al-Awlaki, his parents were from Yemen, they came to the U.S. on a college visa, had al-Awlaki, took him back to Yemen, taught him to hate America,” he said. “And that’s why they couldn’t keep this terrorist al-Awlaki from coming in. And I think one of the reasons they needed to blow him up with a drone strike is if he’d ever been caught, arrested, he would have sung about all the different people he worked with in the administration.”

As evidence of al-Awlaki’s supposed ties with the Obama White House, Gohmert cited photos of a prayer service al-Awlaki led on Capitol Hill early on in the Bush administration.

Earlier this month, anti-LGBT activist Mike Heath of MaineResistance interviewed fellow extremist Religious Right activist Scott Lively, who continued to heap praise on Russian President Vladimir Putin for his crackdown on LGBT rights and hoped that, under a President Trump, similar anti-gay laws could be enacted in America.

Lively, who has called the passage of laws banning the spread of gay "propaganda" in Russia "one of the proudest achievements of my career" and urged the implementation of similar bans all over the world, voiced his hope that President Trump would "delegate to the church the task of shaping the culture."

"I wish we would be able to duplicate that all over the world," Lively said of passing Russian-style anti-gay laws. "That would really solve the problem."

"Frankly, if Trump wins in November," he stated, "then he could turn out to be like Putin in Russia and push back Marxism like Putin did and invite the church to come back in an guide the culture, like Putin did. He delegates, that's his way of governing and his way of doing business and I think he is going to delegate to the church the task of shaping the culture."

"The culture war has always been a battle between cultural Marxists and Christians, always, especially homosexuals among the cultural Marxists," Lively continued, "and [Trump is] pushing the cultural Marxists back and that's his primary target, political correctness, you know, the whole slate of the hard left agenda, he's just pushing back. And that's going to create a vacuum that the church is naturally going to fill because we're the ones who were guiding the culture before the Marxists took it away from us."

Five years ago today, the military’s Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy officially came to an end. And, five years later, conservatives’ dire predictions about the consequences of the policy’s repeal have yet to come true.

This falls into a familiar pattern. Many of the same activists and commentators have made similarly apocalyptic—and unfounded—warnings about the effects of hate crimes laws and marriage equality.

Here are just five of the bogus claims made by those who opposed the repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell:

1) Diapers

Just two years ago, Gordon Klingenschmitt, a former Navy chaplain who is now a Colorado Republican state lawmaker, approvingly read a quote from Chaplain John R. Kauffman, who said that gay service members will be “taking breaks on the combat field to change diapers all because their treacherous sin causes them to lose control of their bowels.”

2) Bestiality

Conservative columnist Laurie Roth said that thanks to the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, military service members would be free to have intimate moments with goats and boars.

3) ‘Virtual Genocide’

In 2011, American Family Radio host Bryan Fischer predicted that after the policy’s repeal took effect “the homosexual lobby” would be “committing one hate crime after another against service members” who objected to homosexuality.

“We are going to see principle-driven officers, one after another, become the victims of systematic hate crimes,” he said. “This is going to be a pogrom. This is going to be virtual genocide, military genocide, career genocide for people of faith in the military perpetrated by the homosexual lobby.”

4) Reinstatement of the Draft

Before the congressional vote to repeal the policy, Family Research Council President Tony Perkins criticized President Obama’s “drive to repeal the ban on open homosexuality in the military” by warning that it “could have this unintended consequence: It could bring back the draft.”

He said that supporters of the repeal wanted to “appease a small base of Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi” and “sacrifice the lives of young Marines who are putting their life on the line for this nation.”

“I don’t know how they can live with that, knowing that the blood of those young Marines will be on their hands,” he added.

Perkins’ fellow Religious Right activist Elaine Donnelly of the Center for Military Readiness similarly warned that the end of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell “could put remaining troops in greater danger” and “break the All-Volunteer Force.”

“The draft will return with a vengeance and out of necessity,” Fischer wrote. “What young man wants to voluntarily join an outfit that will force him to shower naked with males who have a sexual interest in him and just might molest him while he sleeps in his bunk?”

5) ‘Sitting Around Getting Massages All Day’

In 2014, Rep. Louie Gohmert, R-Texas, said that gay service members, just like in Ancient Greece, won’t perform well in battle because they will be “sitting around getting massages all day” from their same-sex lovers rather than preparing for battle, making them “vulnerable to terrorism.”

Conservative activist David Horowitz insisted in an interview with Newsmax yesterday that Hillary Clinton has done worse things than Sen. Joe McCarthy, because while McCarthy was, in his view, unfairly maligned for his infamous communist hunts, Clinton has had the nerve to criticize conservatives and Donald Trump.

McCarthy, he said, was right about “99 percent of the people he brought before his committees” but has been portrayed poorly because “the left writes the history books in America.”

“But look at what Hillary has done,” he said. “She’s the originator of the ‘vast right-wing conspiracy.’ Every word out of her mouth is accusing Trump and Republicans of recruiting for ISIS, of being traitors. For crying out tears, these progressives, these Democrats think they’re holier than thou, they think that they stand for equality and tolerance. No they don’t, they stand for bigotry and the oppression of blacks in the inner cities.”

In a September 16 post on its website, MassResistance wrote that over the summer Camenker responded to a plea for help from organizers of Mexico’s National Front for the Family. Camenker sent the group digital files of the Spanish-language version of his group’s booklet, “What same-sex ‘marriage’ has done to Massachusetts: It’s far worse than most people realize” and a Spanish version of his group’s video, “What ‘gay marriage’ has done to Massachusetts.” (Among the “shocking” things the video mentions are requirements that insurance companies must recognize legal marriages by same-sex couples and lawyers must learn about legal equality.)

The post says that the California chapter of MassResistance is planning to hold a rally in solidarity at the Mexican consulate in Los Angeles and hopes that other chapters will get on board. The National Organization for Marriage has announced plans for an anti-marriage-equality rally at the Mexican embassy in Washington, D.C. this Friday, September 23. CitizenGo, a conservative platform for online organizing that has mobilized on behalf of anti-gay efforts around the globe, is also promoting the D.C. event.

Camenker was a speaker at an anti-gay summit that was held in Salt Lake City last October on the eve of a World Congress of Families summit. Camenker disagreed with people who urged anti-LGBT activists to always speak the truth in love. “I think there is a place for being insulting and degrading, and I think I can back that up by scripture,” he said. As we reported at the time:

Camenker said that in the Old Testament, “God has two sets of laws regarding how you treat your fellow man.” One is how you treat your neighbor, who you might work with and forgive. “There’s a whole different set of rules for people who want to tear down society, who want to push immorality, who want to tear down the moral structure of society.” That set of rules is “very brutal,” he said. “God says those people who want to do that must be destroyed.”

He said the LGBT movement is a “house of cards” that is “held together by force, intimidation, and propaganda” and can be destroyed by standing up to it, the way communism was. “We are in a war,” he repeated, saying of gay-rights advocates, “They would send us to concentration camps if they could.”

These are all events that Religious Right activists— inaccurately —predicted would happen during President Obama’s time in office. But sadly, these are acts that are all too common around the world.

Most recently, Russian President Vladimir Putin has stepped up his attacks on Christians who belong to denominations other than the Russian Orthodox Church, particularly Protestants, Mormons and Jehovah’s Witnesses.

But none of this has stopped Putin’s American fans from singing his praises, even while they claim that President Obama has made the U.S. dangerous for Christians.

Donald Trump and Mike Pence have enthusiasticallypraised Putin as a brilliant and mighty trailblazer while at the same time accusing President Obama of hounding Christians at home. In fact, Trump has claimed that the U.S. government is specifically targeting him with a tax audit because he’s “ a strong Christian .”

In reality, Putin’s government has done the very thing that right-wing activists falsely accuse President Obama of doing: arresting Christians, threatening churches and permitting Sharia law in majority-Muslim areas.

But it is Obama they falsely charge with being an enemy of religious liberty, and Putin they shower with praise in spite of his well-documented attacks on freedom.

The admiration for Putin from this segment of the Religious Right reveals an ugly reality behind their claims of religious oppression at the hands of the LGBT rights movement. For these activists, it seems, the persecution of LGBT people is actually more important than preserving true religious freedom, even when the welfare and freedoms of other Christians are at stake.

Today on “The 700 Club,” Pat Robertson responded to a story about conservatives criticizing Obama administration regulations by claiming that the president is a socialist who is hell-bent on destroying America.

“The left, ladies and gentlemen, the so-called progressives, want one thing: They want to bring socialized life to America and they want to control every aspect of the life you and I live,” the televangelist said.

Robertson said President Obama “is trying his dead-level best to impose his view of socialism on this nation and I think we need to call it what it is, he’s a radical socialist and he was nurtured in the school of radical, whatever you call it, revolution and his teachers are those who hate America.”

Obama’s policies, he added, will lead to government control over “everything you do” and “it will be death to this country.”

On his radio program yesterday, Bryan Fischer reacted to the arrest of Ahmad Khan Rahami, who is a suspect in a string of bombings that took place in New York and New Jersey last weekend, by reiterating his call to ban all Muslim from immigrating to the United States, which he justified by onceagain falsely claiming that the U.S. had imposed a travel ban during the height of 2014's Ebola outbreak.

"I have been suggesting for a number of years that we need to suspend Islamic immigration," Fischer said, "because I honestly do not see an alternative. I've said before that Islam is like the Ebola virus of culture; it causes a culture to bleed out from the inside. When we had that Ebola crisis, we had to suspend immigration from any country where there was an Ebola outbreak because we could not know who was a carrier and who wasn't until it was too late, so you just had to be careful with everybody."

Fischer's analogy is total nonsense, especially when you recall that during the outbreak, he accused Obama of intentionally refusing to impose a travel ban because he wanted the disease to come to America as punishment. As we pointed out before, the United States never imposed any sort of travel ban during the Ebola crisis because doing so would have been counterproductive. Instead, the government put in place protocols requiring that anyone traveling to the U.S. from Ebola-affected nations enter through one of five specific airports where enhanced screening would take place:

The Department of Homeland Security has announced that all passengers arriving from Ebola-affected countries in West Africa must go by way of a handful of U.S. airports as part of measures to control the spread of Ebola.

"Today, I am announcing that all passengers arriving in the United States whose travel originates in Liberia, Sierra Leone or Guinea will be required to fly into one of the five airports that have the enhanced screening and additional resources in place," Secretary of Homeland Security Jeh Johnson said in a statement.

Starting on Wednesday, those passengers will then be subject to "secondary screening and added protocols, including having their temperature taken, before they can be admitted into the United States," the statement said.

On Friday, “Trunews” host Rick Wiles thanked Donald Trump for taking on “the birth certificate issue” and urged him to “just leave the issue alone until January 20th” of next year, Inauguration Day, when the real investigation into the veracity of President Obama’s birth certificate can begin.

Wiles said that Trump should drop the issue of Obama’s birth certificate, which he said “is not even a good forgery, it’s a sloppy forgery,” until he takes office as president:

The forgery was so, so bad that we could spend hours just talking about how ludicrous it was. Here’s what Donald Trump can do. When he goes in the White House, he will have access to the White House server, right? Obama put his birth certificate—he put an image, not the birth certificate, he put an image of what he said was his birth certificate, he put it on the White House website. That is now government property. Barack Obama is not permitted to remove it from the White House website. That is U.S. government property.

So, if his birth certificate image disappears on January 20, 2017, that can only mean one thing: The Obamanistas cleaned the White House server to get that image off the server before the Trump people arrived. So, Mr. Obama, you just leave your fake birth certificate digital image on the White House website so that when Mr. Trump gets there, he can have an official verification of whether that is an authentic birth certificate. Just leave the issue alone until January 20th.

Trump, like Wiles, has repeatedlysuggested that Obama’s birth certificate is a forgery, a myth he continued to promote well after the president released a long-form copy of the document, despite recent claims to the contrary from Trump and his campaign.

“We’re being destroyed for a lack of knowledge and we’re headed down a road that’s going to lead to the total destruction of our liberty and freedom and a total destruction of what our founding fathers gave us,” he said. “A total destruction of those things that I believed in very firmly when I, as a young man, raised my right hand and said when I was sworn in to the United States Marine Corps that I would defend and uphold the Constitution against enemies both foreign and domestic.”

Broun continued: “One of those domestic enemies of the Constitution is Barack Obama. Another one is Nancy Pelosi. Another one is Harry Reid. But so is Mitch McConnell. And Paul Ryan. And most of the members of the U.S. Senate as well as the U.S. House of Representatives. We’ve got to get rid of them. Well, we’ve got to make them change from their wicked ways or get rid of them and put people in place who are going to stand firm with a biblical worldview as well as a constitutional governmental view as our founding fathers meant it.”

Last night, "respected prophet" Cindy Jacobs hosted a voter mobilization conference call featuring right-wing pseudo-historian David Barton to discuss "the significant role women can play in elections and impacting the nation."

Barton's remarks consisted largely of the typical talking points that he has been using in recent weeks to try and convince reluctant Christians that they must vote for Donald Trump in November, including doubling down on his belief that Trump must be "God's guy" in the election because he won so many Republican primaries in which conservative Christians voted.

When a caller asked for advice on how to respond to Christians who say they cannot vote for someone like Trump because of his ungodly lifestyle and behavior, Barton dismissed those concerns as little more than people looking for excuses in order to avoid their responsibility to vote. Citing wicked leaders from the Bible whom God used for good, as well as godly leaders in the Bible who displayed various personal failings, Barton declared that Christians do not have a choice about whether or not they are going to vote because God has commanded them to do so and therefore they must vote for the candidate who is going to promote policies that most closely align with the Bible.

In this case, that is Donald Trump and Barton knows that Trump is God's candidate of choice based on the fact that so many Christians voted for him in the Republican primaries.

"God doesn't always think the way we do," Barton said. "The leaders he chooses, the people he calls his servants are often people that would not fit our paradigm, not by a long shot. But I will point out, I have no clue what's in store for America but I guarantee you God knows what we're going to need 16 months from now, 23 months from now, 47 months from now and it may be somebody that, if we Christians had picked and gotten our heart's desire, would not have been competent for what's coming. I have to believe that with the highest recorded turnout, particularly in primaries and as many evangelicals as voted, that not all of them missed hearing from God. They chose people that we would probably not choose as our first choice. It doesn't matter. God's people showed up and voted in record amounts in this election and I've got to believe that God used them to guide us to what we have as our final few choices now."

"So get on board, you're going to vote," Barton concluded. "Now figure out who you are going to vote for and quit making excuses."

Rodriguez also has a long track record of posturing as a political independent who is not wedded to, as he puts it, the agenda of the donkey or elephant, but of the lamb, Jesus Christ. Rodriguez, who had been critical of Trump’s anti-immigration rhetoric earlier in the election process, now says he has had a “wonderful conversation” with Trump and has seen a “significant pivot” from the candidate when it comes to dealing humanely with people who have been in the country illegally for many years.

During the online interview and Q&A session for My Faith Votes, Rodriguez repeated Religious Right alarms about religious liberty, saying that there is a Jezebel spirit in the land, one that intimidates and threatens Christians based on fear and hatred of Christianity and the “biblical worldview.”

Rodriguez fielded a couple of questions from people who are not happy with either of the presidential candidates and were not feeling motivated to vote. He was not having it, telling one person, “In my personal opinion, the number one deliverable from the next president will be the Supreme Court.” Citing the potential for the next president to nominate three or four justices, he said, “Who I vote for has to be connected to which nominee…has committed to nominating justices on the court that will protect life and religious liberty and respect the image of God in every American. That’s what compels me to vote in 2016.”

In response to another discouraged voter, he argued that his very freedom to preach the gospel is at risk:

We have to rise up and look beyond the candidates. We have to look at the issues that are at play here. What’s at risk, truly? Will anything impact me? If I do not vote, will I personally suffer any consequences? Well, if you’re a Christian, if you’re a Bible-believing Christ follower, the answer is yes. There are legislative initiatives right now, that serve, that actually carry the great potential of limiting our expression of our Christian faith.

What if I tell you there are initiatives out there that would attempt to silence us from preaching about what the Bible may deem as sinful, and that speech may be deemed as hate speech, because it runs counter to a cultural narrative out there, a cultural thread or a cultural dynamic? Not only that; recently, as I alluded to in the beginning of this broadcast, in California there was an attempt to punish Christian colleges and universities for believing the Bible and preaching the Bible. It’s this sort of thing taking place, not only in California but across the nation.

So staying home may very well jeopardize my ability as a pastor to reach people with the loving gospel of Jesus Christ. Without a doubt, staying at home carries the potential of enlarging and increasing the number of abortions that take place in this country. How about this: and around the world, because there are candidates that are committed to funding abortions around the world. My taxpayer money going out and helping someone else terminate a life. So if you care about the sanctity of life, and if you care about religious liberty, then you should care about voting this election.

And again, if you can’t vote for a candidate, vote for the platform, vote for the party platforms, and the party platform that best will protect your right to be a Christian and reach others with the loving, grace-filled message of Jesus Christ.

And in response to a questioner complaining that church leaders are not willing to talk to people about how to vote, he said:

Elections have consequences. Because 25 million Christians did not vote in 2012, the institution of marriage suffered a radical transformation via the conduit of judicial and executive fiat. Elections have consequences. Because 25 million Christians did not vote in 2012, we have more and more children that were aborted, and we had an agency in America that sold aborted baby parts, and they were protected…This time, the stake is even higher and greater. The consequences are more egregious and more serious. So I would tell them, if you care about the future of America, if you care about the future of Christianity in America, you must vote. And you must vote righteousness and justice. And you must vote life and religious liberty. You must vote.

In a segment this morning on “Fox & Friends,” Donald Trump claimed “freedom of the press” was in part to blame for bombings this weekend in New York and New Jersey. His statement was a reminder that he either does not understand or does not like the contents of the First Amendment.

“They’re all talking about it so wonderfully because, you know, it’s called ‘freedom of the press,’ where you buy magazines and they tell you how to make these same bombs that I saw” Trump said. “They tell you how to make bombs. We should arrest the people that do that because they’re participating in crime. Instead they say ‘oh no you can’t do anything, that’s freedom of expression.’”

This is just the latest time that Trump has expressed a dislike for the protections contained in the First Amendment.

In February, during a rally in Fort Worth, Trump suggested he would “open up our libel laws” to make it easier to sue journalists, telling the crowd:

One of the things I’m going to do if I win, and I hope we do, and we’re certainly leading, is I’m going to open up our libel laws so when they write purposely negative and horrible and false articles, we can sue them and win lots of money. We’re going to open up those libel laws so that when The New York Times writes a hit piece, which is a total disgrace, or when The Washington Post, which is there for other reasons, writes a hit piece, we can sue them and win money instead of having no chance of winning because they’re totally protected.

This protection was established in the landmark Supreme Court case New York Times v. Sullivan, which was decided more than 50 years ago. But it clearly hasn’t stopped Trump from wanting to use lawsuits as a weapon against the media: Just this weekend Trump tweeted, “My lawyers want to sue the failing ‪@nytimes so badly for irresponsible intent.”

My lawyers want to sue the failing @nytimes so badly for irresponsible intent. I said no (for now), but they are watching. Really disgusting

And it’s not just the freedom of the press. Trump clearly views other sections of the First Amendment with similar distain.

In an appearance on “Morning Joe” in November, Trump suggested he would ignore the First Amendment’s “free exercise” clause, agreeing that as president he would “strongly consider” closing down some mosques. "I would hate to do it, but it's something that you're going to have to strongly consider because some of the ideas and some of the hatred—the absolute hatred—is coming from these areas," he said.

A month earlier he said that closing down mosques was something “you’re going to have to certainly look at.”

Trump also has expressed disdain for protestors, suggesting he doesn’t simply want them removed from his rallies but would like them to be arrested and get a “big mark” on their records. “Once that starts happening, we're not going to have any more protesters, folks. We're not going to have any more protesters,” he said.

With these statements in mind, Trump’s First Amendment might look something like this:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Trump hasn’t served in government yet; if he were in the White House, he might decide that he isn’t keen on the amendment’s final clause either.

Ex-Rep. Paul Brown, R-Ga., warned in an interview with the far-right radio program “Trunews” yesterday that “we’re headed to an economic collapse” and that God is preparing to judge America for abortion rights and the success of “the homosexual rights agenda.”

Broun told host Rick Wiles that “religious freedom, the freedom of assembly and the freedoms that we have to own firearms all are being greatly eroded,” claiming that the country can only be saved if there is a “revival” in churches and across the country.

“We’ve got to have pastors being bold and speaking the truth about everything,” he said. “We’re killing over a million babies every year through abortion in this country. God is a holy, righteous God and he cannot and will not continue to bless this land while we’re killing all these unborn babies. And we’re destroying the family through all this political correctness and through the homosexual rights agenda. Now it’s up to them and it’s between them and God what they do, but the thing is, that’s a sin just like my sin and we need to recognize that, but we don’t and should not promote sin from a public policy perspective.”

On his radio program today, Bryan Fischer reacted to the arrest of Ahmad Khan Rahami, who is a suspect in a string of bombings that took place in New York and New Jersey over the weekend, by calling for families of Muslims who engage in terrorism within the United States to be stripped of their citizenship and deported.

Rahami is a U.S. citizen who was born in Afghanistan, which prompted Fischer to declare that Rahami should be charged with treason and, if he is found guilty, his entire family should be deported.

"Anybody who is an American citizen who has an Islamic background and has become a citizen like this guy did, what he did really does represent an act of treason," Fischer said. "Citizenship can be revoked for what these individuals do, so revoke their citizenship. Let everybody know we're going to revoke the citizenship for your entire family. We believe in keeping families together, so we will send you all back to your homeland together so you can all be together. But you need to understand, that's what's going to happen if any one member of your family commits an act of terror against the citizens of the United States."

In response to Hillary Clinton’s speech at Temple University and her Mic.com piece reaching out to millennial voters, People For the American Way Press Secretary Laura Epstein released the following statement:

“During Hillary Clinton’s speech today, she outlined why she’ll be a strong advocate for millennials in the White House: She detailed her plans to make higher education more affordable, ensure women receive equal pay for equal work, and enact policies to support working families, like paid family leave and affordable child care. It’s Clinton’s stance on these issues, not Donald Trump’s campaign of racism and bigotry, that millennials will show up for at the ballot box. We’ll support Hillary Clinton because she embraces immigrants instead of pushing mass deportation, and she understands the importance of combatting racism, not enflaming it.

“And as Hillary Clinton has made clear, this election will dramatically affect our generation’s future because of the Supreme Court. While Trump has promised Supreme Court justices who’d overturn abortion rights and reject LGBT rights, Hillary Clinton will appoint justices who will protect fundamental Constitutional rights for all Americans, including protecting Americans’ right to vote over the right of billionaires to buy elections. The next President could nominate up to four Supreme Court justices, and that stark contrast between Clinton and Trump is a big reason why millennials will reject Trump’s campaign of hate and turn out to vote for Hillary Clinton.”

People For the American Way is a progressive advocacy organization founded to fight right-wing extremism and defend constitutional values including free expression, religious liberty, equal justice under the law, and the right to meaningfully participate in our democracy.